It ought to be apparent that if Americans are to “bite the bullet” to control double-digit inflation, our Washington leaders should set the example. But campaign promises of frugality to the contrary, a post-election dee mand for high level salary raises has engulfed the capital – a bad omen for the incoming administration pledged to budget balancing and economic sanity. The week’s main developments: – Recommendations by a Government Commission for an added $241 million in annual salary spending, with top salaries of $120,000 for the chief justice, speaker of the house, and vice president; $85,000 for senators and ccngressmen, and stepped-up pay for more than 35,000 other officials. – The drive generated in the lameduck legislative session by elements of Congress for boosting congressional pay from the present $60,662 to $70,900. The plan, which also would have affected 34,000 other high-level federal employees, was defeated. – A ruling by the Supreme Court that gave its members and 600 other federal judges large raises which Congress had tried to stop. The actions, coming in this lameduck period before a new administration takes office. are reminiscent of recommendations for large salary increases made by the Johnson Administration late in 1968 just before leaving office. Unfortunately. the new Republican administration of President Richard Nixon and the Democratic Congress did indeed boost salaries sharply in February 1969. Sen. John Williams. RDel. warned then the action would spread to all other government employees and the private sector and “trigger another round of inflation.” it did, indeed. And the inflation rate – which had averaged 1.9 percent per year for the 11 years ending in 1967 – climbed to an average of 6.3 percent for the next 11 years. (It leaiped to 13 percent in 1979 an hovers in that general area now A the situation the new administration will inherit.) The generosity of the Government Commission a salary recommendais unrealistic in terms e budget and inflation irs. The report should abated thoroughly and zally if it comes up for aus consideration. ese judicial pay hikes lted from this weeks Supreme Court ruling Congress could not raises automatically duled by statute once had gone into effect; preme Court chief lce. from $75.000 to 100: associate justices. 1 $72.000 to $81.300; aps court judges. from 500 to $65.000; and zral district court es, $54,500 to $61.600; ‘s not exactly “biting bullet.” ederal district judges 1 had challenged gress’ freeze on raises d the Executive Salary Act under which government salaries are adjusted. The high court ruled the 1976 pay boost of 4.8 percent already had taken effect when President Carter signed legislation to stop it. and that the same thing happened in 1979 when a 7.1 percent hike was halted. All this offers little consolation to the taxpayers. burdened by double-digit inflation. high taxes and interest rates. unemployment. and a $900 billionplus nationalgdebt fed by continual deficit spending. Already there are hints the congressional pay issue will come up again in the 97th Congress which convenes in January. irrespective of the Government Commission proposals. The judges maneuver certainly won’t do much to Naturally government pay increases are needed in many categories. But there ought to be careful planning and control. coordinated with budget balancing and the anti – inflation program. it should not be a spasmodic, tug-of-war thing. More attention needs to be given the lower – salaried groups and maybe less to thosel already blessed with generous salaries and fringe benefits. This should be a time of restraint by all elements ot? govemment – not one for: swamping the new Reagan Administration with bi spending proposals. Giv the new leaders time t settle into the business of goveming and of providiig the over-all direction the